Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: lockeliberty
Warfield: "there is no express command to baptize infants in the New Testament, no express record of the baptism of infants and no passage so stringently implying it that we must infer from them that infants were baptized" (cited in Searching Together [Winter Quarter, 1984 – Vol.13:4], p.17).
A little quote from Mr. Warfield.
Charles Spurgeon:

If I thought it wrong to be a Baptist, I should give it up and become what I believed to be right . . . If we could find infant baptism in the Word of God, we would adopt it. It would help us out of a great difficulty, for it would take away from us that reproach which is attached to us – that we are odd and do not do as other people do. But we have looked well through the Bible and cannot find it, and do not believe it is there; nor do we believe that others can find infant baptism in the Scriptures, unless they themselves first put it there (Autobiography).

91 posted on 10/07/2001 6:05:13 AM PDT by George W. Bush
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 77 | View Replies ]


To: George W. Bush
Warfield directly from the text above:

What has this to do with baptism? Certainly nothing directly; only if it be held indirectly to show that infants were received by Christ as members of His Kingdom on earth, that is, of His Church, can it bear on the controversy. But notice Dr. Strong’s comment: “None would have ‘forbidden,’ if Jesus and his disciples had been in the habit of baptizing infants.” Does he really think this touches the matter that is raised by this quotation? Nobody supposes that “Jesus and his disciples” were in the habit of baptizing infants; nobody supposes that at the time these words were spoken, Christian baptism had been so much as yet instituted. Dr. Strong would have to show, not that infant baptism was not practised before baptism was instituted, but that the children were not designated by Christ as members of His “Kingdom,” before the presumption for infant baptism would be extruded from this text. It is his unmeasured zeal to make all texts which have been appealed to by paedobaptists — not merely fail to teach paedobaptism — but teach that children were not baptized, that has led him so far astray here.

Sorry but I still do not see any indgination on the part of Warfield regarding infant baptism but rather an indigination towards Strongs premise that children are not members of the of Kingdom of God.

95 posted on 10/07/2001 8:24:12 AM PDT by lockeliberty
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 91 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson